Discussion, not Provocation

[Edwardo Piet]

I am extremely happy with this rule.

And that was my first thought, too. "This rule is awesome!"

My second thought was "Well, that's Min, Neo and Pool fucked!"

---

Poor min. Many times he posts threads with links that are news related or politics related and doesn't include much more than brief commentary. Is this to say that he can no longer include his witty one-liners?

We would rather see some attempt at starting a discussion. This is, after all, a discussion forum. We aren't a news site, people really shouldn't be getting their news from here at all, considering that in all likelihood there is a left-wing bias among members. I would rather like to see continuous, developing threads about certain newsworthy subjects that multiple small threads about every small thing that happens.

I 100% agree with the rule.

P.S. I get all my news from AF

---

I'm just saying what we'd prefer to see, I'm hoping the community can take that in mind when they create a new thread. There's no rule that says you have to encourage discussion, but it certainly helps when you do.

This announcement is more about provocation than anything.

Another reason I agree with this rule so much is that provocative threads provoke provocative responses and people can get into trouble for responding with provocative posts to a thread that provoked provocative responses . . . which isn't very fair. This rule makes everything far more fair. I know that the trolling rule itself also disallows troll threads but I feel like this rule makes it much clearer and more difficult for people to make troll threads - or unhelpful/provocative threads that provoke provocative responses which then get deemed "trolling" even when the responses are made by a person who clearly isn't a troll - and get away with it.